Children's Centres

Vera Baird: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what progress has been made in the establishment of children's centres.

Maria Eagle: I'm delighted to report that we now have over 500 Sure Start children's centres, supporting nearly 400,000 children in the most disadvantaged areas. We are on course to have centres supporting 650,000 children being supported by children's centres by March. From April we will start rolling out children's centres beyond the most disadvantaged areas, as part of our drive to have 2,500 children's centres by March 2008. Our goal is to have 3,500 children's centres by 2010, one for every community.

Higher Education

Edward Vaizey: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills if she will make a statement on measures to promote fair access to higher education.

Bill Rammell: The Government remains committed to fair access and widening participation in higher education for reasons of social justice and economic need. In England, from 2006, no full-time student will have to pay fees up-front, nor will they repay anything until they leave higher education (HE) and are earning a reasonable wage, Repayments are suspended when not earning and interest will grow only in line with inflation. Students from low income households will once again be entitled to non-repayable grants.
	Alongside this, we have established the Office for Fair Access (OFFA) to promote fair access. OFFA has approved access agreements from 180 institutions intending to charge higher level fees. These will deliver around £300 million in financial support to students from low income backgrounds.
	In 2005–06, HEFCE has allocated £282 million to higher education institutions to help offset the costs associated with recruiting and retaining students from groups under-represented in HE.
	Our Aimhigher programme seeks to raise aspiration and attainment levels among those currently under-represented in HE. We have announced that Aimhigher will continue until at least 2008.
	In addition, we have set out proposals to reform the higher education applications process to make the system fairer to all applicants. We will publish our response to the consultation in the spring.

Higher Education

Helen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills 
	(1)  what recent discussions she has had on the Higher Education Funding Council for England's review of its methods of funding teaching; and if she will make a statement;
	(2)  what representations she has received on the Higher Education Funding Council for England's proposal that funding for teaching in higher education institutions should be based on the number of credits obtained by students; and if she will make a statement;
	(3)  if she will make it her policy that changes in the funding mechanisms for higher education institutions should provide those with a high proportion of part-time students with appropriate support.

Bill Rammell: holding answer 7 February 2006
	We discuss these matters on a regular basis with HEFCE. The council which has been consulting the higher education sector on the future formula to be used for the distribution of grant for teaching. I am sure the council will consider carefully any arguments and evidence which are put forward in the consultation exercise on these issues. We have already brought forward proposals to provide additional support amounting to £40 million over the next two years for part-time students from non-traditional backgrounds.

Learning and Skills Council

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how local Learning and Skills Council offices will be funded to deliver partnership arrangements and economic regeneration; and if she will make a statement.

Bill Rammell: As part of its restructuring plans, the Learning and Skills Council proposes to establish 148 local partnership teams which will work closely with their local communities, understand the needs of individuals and employers at grass roots level and build strategic relationships with local schools, colleges and other learning providers. The local partnership teams will work alongside 35 economic development teams which will focus on skills for employment, regeneration and economic development.
	The local partnership and economic development teams will be funded from within the LSC's existing administration budget. The new structure is expected to achieve savings of around £40 million, which can be reinvested in front-line delivery. The final agreed changes will take effect form summer 2006.

Learning and Skills Council

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what measures are in place to resolve differences between national and local priorities in the Learning and Skills Council, with particular reference to those between level 2 and level 3 obligations.

Bill Rammell: The Government's priorities for post-16 learning are set out in my right hon. Friend's annual Grant Letter to the Learning and Skills Council and in the LSC's "Priorities for Success" document published in October 2005.
	The LSC has introduced a new business planning cycle which is helping to strengthen the local, regional and national planning process. The LSC's Annual Statement of Priorities, along with the more detailed guidance in "Planning for Success" set out the priorities for the LSC. These provide the strategic framework for the development of local plans, which themselves reflect the key learning and skills priorities for the local area, as well as taking into account key national and regional priorities. National priorities include tackling basic skills and extending a new entitlement for fully funded first full Level 2 qualifications in all regions from September 2006. Through the mechanisms outlined above we anticipate a marked increase in the delivery and achievement of first full Level 2s from 2006–07 while also supporting progression to Level 3 and higher skills including technician, advanced craft and trade skills and apprenticeships for adults.
	The LSC's proposed new structure will help to further strengthen its ability to respond flexibly and rapidly to local priorities, while at the same time providing stronger drivers at regional level. The national office will continue to provide the overarching planning and funding framework.

Qualifications

Edward Balls: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what proportion of the population in (a) West Yorkshire, (b) Wakefield District and (c) Normanton constituency aged between 16 and 65 years have no qualifications.

Phil Hope: The following table shows estimates of the proportion of the population aged between 16 and 65 years who have no qualifications. Data comes from the Local Labour Force Survey for 2004–05.
	
		
			  Percentage 
		
		
			 West Yorkshire 17 
			 Wakefield District 17 
			 Normanton constituency 11 
		
	
	Note:
	As with all sample surveys the estimates presented in this table are subject to sampling variability.

Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what time period elapsed between the publication of each Report by the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution and the publication of the official response by the Government; and what the time scale is for publishing outstanding responses.

Elliot Morley: The Government aims to respond to reports of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (RCEP) within one year of their publication. Government needs to consider fully the reports and their recommendations before responding, so response timings depend on the complexity of the reports and the need to take account of the development of policy and proposals for new legislation.
	There are two reports currently awaiting Government response:
	1. 25th Report: "Turning the Tide—Addressing the Impact of Fisheries on the Marine Environment", launched in December 2004. The Government response will be published after the publication of the draft Marine Bill this year in order to reflect the new proposals under the Bill.
	2. Special report "Crop Spraying and the Health of Residents and Bystanders", launched in September 2005. Government expects to publish its response to this report by the summer.
	Previous responses were issued as follows:
	
		
			 Report Date published by RCEP Date of Government response 
		
		
			 Main Reports (Command Papers)   
			 1st Report February 1971 March 1975(2) 
			 2nd Report: Three Issues in Industrial Pollution March 1972 March 1975(2) 
			 3rd Report: Pollution in some September March 1975(2) 
			 British Estuaries and Coastal Waters 1972 — 
			 4tn Report: Pollution Control: Progress and Problems December 1974 March 1975(2) 
			 5th Report: Air Pollution Control: an Integrated Approach January 1976 December 1982 
			 6th Report: Nuclear Power and the Environment September 1976 May 1977 
			 7th Report: Agriculture and Pollution September 1979 December 1983 
			 8th Report: Oil Pollution of the Sea October 1981 December 1983 
			 9th Report: Lead in the Environment April 1983 July 1983 
			 10th Report: Tackling Pollution-Experience and Prospects February 1984 December 1984 
			 11th Report: Managing Waste: The Duty of Care December 1985 September 1986 
			 12th Report: Best Practicable Environmental Option February 1988 December 1992 
			 13th Report: The Release of Genetically Engineered Organisms to the Environment July 1989 June 1993 
			 14th Report: GENHAZ-A System for the Critical Appraisal of Proposals to Release Genetically Modified Organisms into the Environment June 1991 December 1994 
			 15th Report: Emissions from Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicles September 1991 December 1992 
			 16th Report: Freshwater Quality June 1992 February 1995 
			 17th Report: Incineration of Waste May 1993 July 1994 
			 18th Report: Transport and the Environment October 1994 1996 Green Paper "Transport: The Way Forward" addressed issues raised 
			 19th Report: Sustainable Use of Soil February 1996 January 1997 
			 20th Report: Transport and the Environment-Developments since 1994 September 1997 October 1998 
			 21st Report: Setting Environmental Standards October 1998 July 2000 
			 22nd Report: Energy-The Changing Climate June 2000 February 2003 
			 23rd Report: Environmental Planning, England March 2002 July 2003 
			 24th Report: Chemicals in Products-Safeguarding the Environment and Human Health June 2003 August 2004 
			
			 Special Reports   
			 Special Report: The Environmental Effects of Civil Aircraft in Flight November 2002 No official response but recommendations were incorporated in "The Future of Air Transport" White Paper published in December 2003 
			 Special Report: Biomass as a Renewable Energy Source May 2004 October 2004 
		
	
	(2) Part of the consolidated response to the first four reports.

Severn Trent Water

Daniel Kawczynski: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps the Government are taking to ensure a good service for customers of Severn Trent Water.

Elliot Morley: Customers of water and sewerage companies are entitled to guaranteed standards of service, as laid down in the Water Supply and Sewerage Services (Customer Service Standards) Regulations. These regulations, known as the guaranteed standards scheme, set minimum standards of services to be met for all customers and prescribe minimum payments where service is below these standards.
	The economic regulator Ofwat monitors the level of service provided to customers by water companies. Each company's performance against a number of measures is included in "Levels of service for the water industry in England and Wales report 2004–05". Performance is measured against a number of indicators. Severn Trent's performance is acceptable or better for each of these measures. At reviews of price limits companies are rewarded for good performance and penalised for poor performance in delivering services to customers.
	Fair comparisons between companies depend on Ofwat receiving accurate information of a comparable nature from the companies. Following allegations by a member of Severn Trent's staff Ofwat is undertaking an investigation into the accuracy of information submitted by Severn Trent. The Serious Fraud Office is also investigating matters referred to it by Ofwat. Ofwat will shortly be publishing a report on its findings. The company has agreed that if it were found that customers had been overcharged any necessary corrections would be effected in a prompt manner to be agreed with Ofwat.

Social Exclusion

Daniel Rogerson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans the Government have to provide core funding for (a) wheels to work and (b) wheels to learning schemes in rural areas.

Jim Knight: Across England there are 69 'wheels to work' and 'wheels to learning' schemes, providing short term transport solutions for young people who have difficulties accessing training, employment and educational opportunities. Many of the schemes have operated successfully for a number of years, supported by funding from a range of different sources.
	It is up to each RDA to determine the priorities for its region and, through its corporate plan, how they will achieve their agreed outcomes. A number of RDAs are planning ongoing support for 'wheels to work' schemes in their regions. For example, following a successful evaluation of the region's wheels to work schemes, Advantage West Midlands have determined to ensure a consistent region wide service is in place from the beginning of the 2006–07 financial year. The Northwest Regional Development Agency (NWDA) has commissioned a region-wide proposal to deliver a 'wheels to work' scheme across rural areas. This will draw on good practice from the ex-Countryside Agency schemes, which will come to an end on 31 March.
	Local authorities continue to be the main funders of transport in rural areas. And guidance for those who are seeking funding is available in the Countryside Agency's publication "A guide to finding funding for Rural Transport Partnership projects", which is available at:
	http://www.countryside.gov.uk/Publications/articles/Publication_tcm2–20283.asp?bMultiplePDFs=true

Spent Nuclear Fuel

Jennifer Willott: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much spent nuclear fuel has been stored in Wales in each year since 1997, (a) in total and (b) broken down by (i) low level waste, (ii) intermediate level waste and (iii) high level waste; and if she will make a statement.

Elliot Morley: Currently around 400 tonnes of spent fuel is stored in Wales. Spent fuel from Welsh reactors is of the Magnox type and is not regarded as waste and is routinely reprocessed at Sellafield. Reprocessing spent fuel there does create high level waste but there is no high level waste in Wales. More detailed information on the location of spent fuel at specific locations at specific times is not normally made public for security reasons.
	Data is not separately recorded for the wastes produced at Sellafield as a result of reprocessing spent fuel from Welsh reactors. However, there has been and still is intermediate and low level waste in Wales which arises from both reactor operations and radio-pharmaceutical production. Data from the 1998, 2001 and 2004 UK radioactive waste inventories has been used to generate the following table of wastes in Wales. The cost of obtaining annual figures exceeds the normal threshold.
	
		
			 Waste type 1998 2001 2004 
		
		
			 Low 161 633 558 
			 Intermediate 2,208 2,851 2,740 
			 High 0 0 0 
			 Total 2,369 3,484 3,298 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Units: cubic meters of waste in stock.
	2. Aggregated conditioned and not-yet conditioned volume fractions.

Water

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much water on average was (a) available to and (b) consumed by each person in the UK in the last year for which figures are available, broken down by (i) water company and (ii) region.

Elliot Morley: The Director General of Water Services publishes data on the extent of water supply annually in the 'Security of Supply, Leakage and the Efficient Use of Water' reports, copies of which are available in the Library of the House. In 2004–05, the figures for England and Wales were as follows:
	
		
			 Water company Distribution input (Ml/d) Average household Consumption (l/h/d) 
		
		
			 Anglian 1,163 143 
			 Bournemouth and W Hants 164 167 
			 Bristol 287 153 
			 Cambridge 75 148 
			 Dee Valley 68 145 
			 Dwr Cymru 868 151 
			 Folkestone and Dover 46 159 
			 Mid Kent 163 167 
			 Northumbrian North 719 146 
			 Northumbrian South 464 158 
			 Portsmouth 180 159 
			 Severn Trent 1,925 132 
			 South East 391 173 
			 South Staffordshire 332 146 
			 South West 456 161 
			 Southern 586 157 
			 Sutton and East Surrey 161 173 
			 Tendring Hundred 30 125 
			 Thames 2,809 159 
			 Three Valleys 877 178 
			 United Utilities 1,953 142 
			 Wessex 372 146 
			 Yorkshire 1,287 145 
			
			 Region   
			 Midlands 2,257 139 
			 Eastern 1,733 143 
			 Northumbria 719 146 
			 NorthWest 1,953 142 
			 Southern 1,367 163 
			 SouthWest 456 161 
			 Thames 3,847 170 
			 Wales 936 148 
			 Wessex 823 155 
			 Yorkshire 1,287 145 
		
	
	Regional data for average household consumption is based on unweighted averages.

Heathrow Noise Review

Alan Keen: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what account his Department took of the potential impact of the Review of the British Airports Authority Heathrow Noise Fines Fund in preparation of the Civil Aviation Bill; what discussions his Department has had with the review team; what assessment he has made of its terms of reference; when he expects it to report; and whether his Department plans to respond to its findings.

Karen Buck: The BAA Heathrow Noise Fines Fund is a matter for the airport operator concerned. The Department is aware that BAA is reviewing this fund, but has not discussed it with the review team or made any assessment of the review's terms of reference.

Rail Safety

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what proportion of trains are fitted with data recorders; and if he will make a statement.

Derek Twigg: All passenger and freight trains that operate on Britain's mainline rail network are fitted with a form of data recording system. The data recorded includes information such as train speed, the brake controller position and brake equipment response. The information can be used to record and monitor a driver's and the train's performance. It is also of vital importance for investigating rail incidents.

Carbon-free Electricity

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what research the Government are (a) commissioning and (b) sponsoring on the development of a hydrogen-based economy, with particular reference to the production of carbon-free electricity.

Malcolm Wicks: The DTI commissioned two reports in 2004 in relation to hydrogen: "Hydrogen Energy Support in the UK" and "A Strategic Framework for Hydrogen Energy in the UK". These reports have been published on the Department's website 1 .
	Government research funding includes support for industrial collaborative research and development for fuel cell and hydrogen technologies through the DTI's Technology Programme. The programme seeks to advance these technologies for both stationary power generation and transport applications, with a view to achieving the cost reductions and performance levels necessary for commercial deployment. This support currently amounts to approximately between £2–3 million per annum.
	Basic research in universities on both fuel cells and hydrogen is supported by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), including through the SUPERGEN initiative. SUPERGEN supports the UK Sustainable Hydrogen Energy Consortium (UK SHEC) which has received funding of £2.5 million. This programme is supporting projects on: hydrogen generation; hydrogen storage; and socio-economic implications for a hydrogen economy. In addition to SUPERGEN, EPSRC has awarded £1 million to investigate the potential role of formic acid as a chemical method for the storage of hydrogen. £500,000 has been granted to three projects on fundamental science and engineering relevant to the hydrogen economy. EPSRC also contributes to projects through the DTI's Technology Programme. More widely, the research councils EPSRC, ESRC, and NERC have recently established the UK Energy Research Centre.
	Hydrogen and fuel cell projects are also eligible to apply to the Carbon Trust for research funding. The list of projects currently funded (including those that relate to hydrogen and fuel cells) is available on their website at: http://www.thecarbontrust.co.uk/carbontrust/low_carbon tech/dlct2_l_4.aspx.
	On 15 June 2005,1 announced the Government's response to the report "A Strategic Framework for Hydrogen Energy Activity in the UK" 2 which includes a funding commitment of £15 million over four years for a UK wide hydrogen and fuel cell demonstration programme. The demonstration scheme is currently in preparation, and will require EC state aid approval.
	The Government have also provided funding of over £450,000 for the trial of three hydrogen-powered fuel cell buses in London as part of the EU CUTE (Clean Urban Transport in Europe) project. £7.5 million of funding has been provided for the fuel cell and low carbon vehicle technology Centre of Excellence (CENEX) based in Loughborough.
	The Department for Transport announced in January, as part of their Horizons innovative research programme, a competition for projects to investigate the options for the further steps required to move to the adoption of a hydrogen transport infrastructure. It is hoped to support between two and four projects examining the practicality and timing of the introduction of the required infrastructure to support hydrogen-fuelled vehicles at a cost of up to £500,000.
	1 The text of these reports is freely available at: http://www.dti.gov.uk/energy/sepn/hydrogen.shtml.
	2 The Government's response is also available on the website.

Centre for Ecology and Hydrology

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what estimate he made of likely job losses at the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology.

Barry Gardiner: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given in another place on 18 January 2006, Official Report, column WA107 by my noble Friend the Minister for Farming and Food to the noble Baroness Byford.

Parliamentary Questions

David Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when he will provide an answer to question 10236, on departmental expenditure, tabled by the hon. Member for Monmouth on 4 July 2005.

Alan Johnson: According to our database this question was answered on 21 July 2005 but, unfortunately did not find its way into the Official Report for that day. The answer was as follows:
	"Expenditure on advertising by my Department through COI for 2000/1, 2001/2, 2002/3, 2003/4 and 2004/5 was £6.1 million, £9.4million, £11.5million, £4.1 and £2million respectively. Figures include advertising by the Small Business Service and exclude VAT".

Renewables Obligation Certificates

Charles Hendry: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what assistance is available to microgenerators in relation to the sale of renewables obligation certificates.

Malcolm Wicks: Sale of Renewable Obligation Certificates (ROCs) is a matter for the generator concerned. However, the Government does recognise the barriers that microgenerators may experience in accessing the benefits of the Renewables Obligation (RO) and intends to introduce several measures, through the Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Private Members Bill, which will make this easier. In particular, allowing agents to act on behalf of small generators and to amalgamate output for several small generators as well as the removal of the need for a sell and buyback agreement. The detail of these changes will be set out in secondary legislation and subject to full consultation.

London Olympics

Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport pursuant to the answer of 30 January 2006, Official Report, column 50W, on the Olympic games, if she will list the occasions on which (a) the Inter-Departmental Steering Group and (b) the network of Olympic co-ordinators have met; and if she will make a statement.

Richard Caborn: As I explained to the hon. Member for Bath on 2 February 2006, Official Report, column 640W the inter-departmental steering group and the network of Olympic co-ordinators will meet on a quarterly basis.

Parliamentary Questions

David Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many parliamentary questions tabled in the last 12 months for answer by her on a named day (a) were transferred and (b) received a substantive answer (i) on the day named and (ii) after the day named.

David Lammy: The Department for Culture, Media and Sport aims to ensure that hon. Members receive a substantive response to their named day questions on the named day. However, as my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House (Mr. Hoon) said at business questions on 2 February 2006, Official Report, column 475, it is also important that Departments have the opportunity to produce accurate and detailed responses to such questions. From time to time, that necessitates the issuing of a holding answer. DCMS does make every effort to meet the deadline requested.
	314 parliamentary questions were tabled to DCMS for answer on a named day during the last 12 months—1 February 2005 to 31 January 2006. 184 (58.6 per cent.) received a substantive answer on the day named with 130 (41.4 per cent.) receiving an answer after the day named.
	Information on questions transferred to other Government Departments could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

Bolivia

Mark Simmonds: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what assistance the UK has provided to Bolivia following the recent flooding; and if he will make a statement.

Gareth Thomas: Initial assessment findings, from joint missions involving the Government of Bolivia, United Nations agencies, the Red Cross and non-governmental organisations, report that 12,000 families have been affected by the recent floods in Bolivia, brought on by heavy rainfall over the last few weeks. Heavy rains are expected to continue in parts of the country before slowing down towards the end of this week. A total of 2,3000 families are reported to be displaced and in temporary shelters across the affected areas (largely in the departments of Santa Cruz and Beni). 2,400 houses have been damaged or destroyed. The immediate relief needs identified are food (for up to 7,000 families), water (for 4,645 families, temporary shelter, mosquito nets and mattresses (for approximately 3,500 families).
	The United States Agency for International Development has already provided $300,000 of relief assistance including sufficient plastic sheeting for 1,000 tents, seven water bladders of 10–12,000 litres capacity and 3,000 wool blankets. It has also provided 100 tons of food and is considering additional funding. The United Nations office for the coordination of humanitarian affairs has allocated an emergency grant of $30,000 for the purchase of relief items. The European Commission's humanitarian office is also considering a response.
	The early response of traditional donors in the region indicates that the immediate emergency needs of affected people appear to have been or will soon be met. However, DFID is continuing to monitor the evolving situation in Bolivia closely.

Departmental Information

Roger Gale: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how much was spent on the Department's public relations and information services in each of the last five years for which figures are available.

Gareth Thomas: DFID expenditure on public relations is through the Press Office in the following table are the figures available:
	
		
			 Financial year Amount £ 
		
		
			 2001–02 (8)148, 000 
			 2002–03 (8)191,000 
			 2003–04 404,000 
			 2004–05 682,000 
			 2005–06(9) 600,500 
		
	
	(8) staff costs only
	(9) to 7 February 2006
	DFID's information services are through the DFID website and the public enquiry point.
	The public enquiry point is an integral part of the larger building support for development team, and as such, the costs have never been held separately and would incur disproportionate costs to disaggregate them.
	
		Website costs
		
			 Financial year Amount £ 
		
		
			 2001–02 122,504 
			 2002–03 64,677 
			 2003–04 147,958 
			 2004–05 (10)130,370 
			 2005–06(11) 121,983 
		
	
	(10) estimated
	(11) to date
	Please note that the figure for financial year 2004–05 is an estimate because of structural re-organisation within DFID, which has made costs difficult to disaggregate.

Employment Statistics

Nigel Evans: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many (a) private sector jobs in (i) agriculture, (ii) manufacturing and (iii) the service sector and (b) public sector jobs there were in (A) Ribble Valley and (B) Lancashire in each of the last 10 years.

John Healey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician who has been asked to reply.
	Letter from Karen Dunnell dated 9 February 2006
	As National Statistician, I have been asked to reply to your parliamentary question about private and public sector employment. (49795)
	The Office for National Statistics (ONS) compiles statistics for the United Kingdom of public sector employment from a quarterly survey of public sector organisations. However, estimates at local area level are not available.
	Information at local area level is only available from the annual local area Labour Force Survey (LFS)/Annual Population Survey (APS) of individual people in households. However, in this source, the categorisation of employment in the public or private sector depends upon the responses from the individuals interviewed. As reported by ONS in October 2005 in the publication "Public Sector Employment Trends", some individuals tend to misreport private sector employment as being in the public sector hence leading to overestimates of the share of public sector employment.
	With this reservation about the data quality, table 1 shows the number of persons in private sector and public sector employment for people resident in the Kibble Valley parliamentary constituency, as shown by the annual local area LFS for the 12 month periods ending February 1999 to February 2004, and from the APS for the 12 months ending December 2004. Table 2 shows data for people resident in Lancashire. Estimates are not available for earlier years.
	These estimates, as with any from sample surveys, are subject to a margin of uncertainty. Changes in the estimates from year to year should be treated with particular caution.
	
		Table 1: Persons in employment resident in the Ribble Valley parliamentary constituency by private-public sector split(14)
		
			 thousand 
			  Private Sector 
			 12 months ending Agriculture Manufacturing Services Other industries(15) Public Sector Total 
		
		
			 February 1999 * 12 20 4 11 47 
			 February 2000 1 13 20 4 12 49 
			 February 2001 1 11 18 5 15 50 
			 February 2002 1 8 24 5 14 51 
			 February 2003 1 8 25 5 13 52 
			 February 2004 1 10 20 5 12 47 
			 December 2004 1 7 19 6 13 46 
		
	
	(14) Public/private sector split based on responses from individuals responding to the annual local area Labour Force Survey and the Annual Population Survey. This generally results in overestimates of public sector employment.
	(15) Other industries are fishing, energy and water and construction.
	Note:
	Estimates are subject to sampling variability. Changes from year to year should be treated with particular caution.
	Source:
	Annual local area Labour Force Survey; Annual Population Survey
	
		Table 2: Persons in employment resident in Lancashire by private-public sector split(16)
		
			 thousand 
			  Private Sector 
			 12 months ending Agriculture Manufacturing Services Other industries(17) Public Sector Total 
		
		
			 February 1999 7 117 220 39 120 506 
			 February 2000 8 114 229 38 124 517 
			 February 2001 8 119 225 32 133 518 
			 February 2002 7 112 227 30 138 516 
			 February 2003 6 107 233 44 133 528 
			 February 2004 6 100 255 42 138 544 
			 December 2004 7 91 242 45 137 526 
		
	
	(16) Public/private sector split based on responses from individuals responding to the annual local area Labour Force Survey and the Annual Population Survey. This generally results in overestimates of public sector employment.
	(17) Other industries are Fishing, Energy and Water and Construction.
	Note:
	Estimates are subject to sampling variability. Changes from year to year should be treated with particular caution.
	Source:
	Annual local area Labour Force Survey; Annual Population Survey.

Ports (Security)

Jim Cousins: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
	(1)  how many whole-time equivalent staff of HM Revenue and Customs and its predecessors were employed in the investigation and surveillance of (a) ports and (b) airports in each year since 1999–2000;
	(2)  if he will list (a) ports and (b) airports which had a permanent HM Revenue and Customs presence in each year since 1999–2000.

Dawn Primarolo: I refer to the answer given on 8 June 2004, Official Report, column 370 by the Financial Secretary to the Treasury my hon. Friend the hon. Member for Wentworth (John Healey) to the hon. Member for South-East Cambridgeshire (Mr. Paice).

Real Estate Investment Trusts

Theresa Villiers: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment he has made of the merits of establishing a regulatory framework for unlisted real estate investment trusts.

Ivan Lewis: I refer the hon. Lady to the answer she received from my hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury (John Healey) on 26 January 2006, Official Report, columns 2265–2266W.

Tax Credits

Frank Field: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer when his Department expects to publish full results for the level of compliance in tax credits for 2003–04; and what research has been undertaken on compliance risk monitoring.

Dawn Primarolo: holding answer 6 February 2006
	HMRC is carrying out a random inquiry program of a representative sample of finalised claims across the tax credit population to measure the level of fraud and claimant error in tax credits. Final results for the 2003–04 exercise will be published in spring 2006.
	HMRC constantly monitors claim activity and acts to intercept potentially fraudulent claims before payments are made and adapts its methods in the light of evidence on attempted fraud. HMRC continuously reviews and updates their processes to ensure they provide a robust defence against the risk of organised fraud.

Tax Credits

Stephen Crabb: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
	(1)  what the total value has been of compensation payments made as a result of (a) delays and (b) mistakes in calculating tax credit awards;
	(2)  how many people have received compensation payments as a result of (a) delays and (b) mistakes in the calculation of tax credit awards.

Dawn Primarolo: The circumstances in which the former Inland Revenue and HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) will make compensation payments to its customers are explained in the Department's code of practice 1 "Putting things right" which is available at www.hmrc.gov.uk/leaflets/cop1.pdf
	The Department will pay compensation for reasonable costs incurred as a direct result of their mistakes or delays and to recognise worry and distress caused by those mistakes and delays.
	The Department will make a compensation payment if they believe it is justified even if the customer has not asked for compensation.
	For the value and number of compensation payments made in relation to tax credits, by HMRC's Tax Credit Office and contact centres, to 30 September 2005, I refer the hon. Member to the answers I gave the right hon. Member for Maidstone and The Weald (Miss Widdecombe) on 22 November 2005, Official Report, column 1913W and the hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Laws) on 15 November 2005, Official Report, column 1212W.

Afghanistan

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence 
	(1)  what funds his Department has provided to support training of the Afghan army and police force in each year since 2002; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  what preparations have been made by his Department to build Afghan national army and police capacity with a view to transferring responsibility for security in Afghanistan to the indigenous forces; and if he will make a statement.

John Reid: The US is the G8 lead nation for developing the Afghan national army (ANA), and 27,000 Afghan soldiers have been trained under their auspices. Over 60,000 policemen have been trained by the German-led police reform programme.
	The UK has assisted training by providing resources and assisting ANA capacity building within the US-led effort, including NCO training for the ANA and, from April 2006, junior officer training for the ANA. The UK Ministry of Defence (MOD) has also provided two civilian advisers to work with the Afghan MOD to help build its capacity, and there are Afghan cadets at Sandhurst.
	The UK Ministry of Defence does not contribute funds specifically to ANP training, although financial support has been provided by the global conflict prevention pool, which is jointly funded and administered by MOD, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Department for International Development. This breaks down as follows:
	
		
			  £ million 
			  ANA ANP 
		
		
			 2002–03: 5 90,000 
			 2003–04: 1.25 2.5 
			 2004–05: 3.5 1.5 
		
	
	In addition, the UK has provided senior police advisers based at UK-led provincial reconstruction team and UK forces deployed under the NATO-led international security assistance force (ISAF) help provide the secure environment in which police reform can take place. The UK's provincial reconstruction team in Helmand will include police reform experts, and UK troops will work closely with the ANA as they take on an increasing responsibility for security in the Province.
	The ISAF has a key role to play in facilitating the development of both the ANA and ANP, enabling them to operate with greater and more co-ordinated effect, thereby bringing security and stability to the entire country.

Press Coverage

Gordon Prentice: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on how many occasions since 1 April 2003 he has complained to the Press Complaints Commission about the coverage in the press of (a) Ministers or officials and (b) his Department; and how many of these complaints were upheld.

John Reid: Since 1 April 2003 the Ministry of Defence has made four complaints to the Press Complaints Commission; all by my right hon. Friend the then Secretary of State, (Mr. Hoon). Three were upheld and one was not pursued.

A Level Results

James Clappison: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what proportion of pupils making A level entries in Northern Ireland obtained passes at (a) grade A level and (b) grades A and B level in each of the last 20 years.

Angela Smith: The requested information is as follows:
	
		
			   Percentage 
			  Entries achieving pass at: 
			 Academic year Grade A Grades A-B 
		
		
			 1995/96 32 57 
			 1996/97 33 59 
			 1997/98 33 61 
			 1998/99 37 64 
			 1999/2000 39 67 
			 2000/01 41 68 
			 2001/02 44 72 
			 2002/03 43 72 
			 2003/04 44 73 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. The latest available data relates to the 2003/04 academic year.
	2. The earliest available data relates to the 1995/96 academic year.

Child Poverty

Sammy Wilson: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many children are living in poverty in Northern Ireland in each constituency; and what the equivalent figures were in each of the past five years.

Angela Smith: Information is not available for the period requested as the data source households below average income was introduced to Northern Ireland in 2002–03 whereas in GB the survey was introduced in 1994–95. Also to enable estimates for individual Northern Ireland constituencies as requested, it was necessary to combine data for years 2002–03 and 2003–04. The following table shows the numbers and percentages of children living in relative income poverty before housing costs and after housing costs across parliamentary constituencies in Northern Ireland for that period.
	
		Number and percentage of children in relative poverty by parliamentary constituency for 2002–03 and 2003–04 combined
		
			  Relative poverty 
			  Before housing costs After housing costs 
			 Parliamentary constituency Number Percentage Number Percentage 
		
		
			 Belfast East 3,500 23 4,200 29 
			 Belfast North 5,300 29 5,200 28 
			 Belfast South 2,100 17 2,900 24 
			 Belfast West 5,900 24 6,900 28 
			 East Antrim 2,900 16 3,700 20 
			 East Londonderry 8,000 30 7,600 29 
			 Fermanagh and South Tyrone 7,100 22 9,500 30 
			 Foyle 9,200 32 9,200 32 
			 Lagan Valley 2,900 13 3,300 15 
			 Mid Ulster 5,600 34 7,300 44 
			 Newry and Armagh 4,500 20 5,600 25 
			 North Antrim 8,000 24 8,500 25 
			 North Down 2,800 13 4,200 20 
			 South Antrim 4,800 14 6,500 20 
			 South Down 5,600 17 7,000 22 
			 Strangford 2,400 12 2,600 13 
			 Upper Bann 8,000 21 7,900 21 
			 West Tyrone 6,600 30 8,500 38 
			 All 95,000 22 110,500 25 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Numbers are rounded to the nearest hundred and percentages to the nearest whole number, therefore individual numbers by parliamentary constituencies may not sum to Northern Ireland total.
	2. As with any sample survey the numbers and percentages quoted in the table above are subject to a degree of sampling error.
	3. A single year's data does not provide robust results at the level of parliamentary constituency. It was therefore necessary to combine two years data to allow robust analysis this level.
	4. The data was sourced from Households Below Average Income Northern Ireland (HBAI NI). The HBAI NI is based on information collected from the Family Resources Survey (FRS). The FRS was first run in NI in 2002–03. Therefore data is not available prior to 2002–03. The NBAI was first introduced in Great Britain in 1994–95.
	5. The HBAI is the main source of income poverty measures throughout the UK and is used to monitor the United Kingdom's child poverty targets.
	6. Relative income poverty is defined as having an income less than 60 per cent. of the contemporary median income.
	7. Income before housing costs (BHC) includes the following main components: usual net earnings from employment; profit or loss from self-employment (losses are treated as a negative income); all social security benefits (including housing benefit, social fund, maternity, funeral and community care grants but excluding social fund loans) and tax credits; income from occupational and private pensions; investment income; maintenance payments, if a person receives them directly; income from educational grants and scholarships (including, for students, top up loans and parental contributions); the cash value of certain forms of income in kind (free school meals, free welfare milk, free school milk and free TV licence for those aged 75 and over).
	8. Income is net of the following items: income tax payments; national insurance contributions; domestic rates (this includes water and sewerage charges for Northern Ireland); contributions to occupational pension schemes (including all additional voluntary contributions (AVCs) to occupational pension schemes, and any contributions to personal pensions); all maintenance and child support payments, which are deducted from the income of the person making the payment and parental contributions to students living away from home.
	9. Income after housing costs (AHC) is derived by deducting a measure of housing costs from BHC income measure. Housing costs include the following: rent (gross of housing benefit); water rates, mortgage interest payments (net of tax relief); structural insurance premiums (for owner occupiers); ground rent and service charges.
	Source:
	Households Below Average Income 2002–03 and 2003–04 Department for Social Development.

Departmental Expenditure

Pete Wishart: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what has been the annual expenditure on vehicles for (a) his Department and (b) each (i) non-departmental public body, (ii) executive agency and (iii) other public body for which he is responsible in (A) Scotland, (B) Wales, (C) each of the English regions and (D) Northern Ireland in each of the last three financial years; and what the planned expenditure is for 2005–06.

Phil Woolas: Expenditure on vehicles purchased for ODPM and bodies where information is available is as follows. No vehicles are provided by the ODPM in Northern Ireland or Scotland. The Department also supports specialist vehicles engaged in the transportation of resilience equipment in England and Wales and these figures are shown in the total. The Department does not maintain a record of expenditure broken down by region.
	
		
			   £ million 
			  2002–03 2003–04 2004–05 (19)2005–06 
		
		
			 ODPM England 6.9 8.245 8.17 5.642 
			 Agencies 0 0.441 0.030 0.848 
			 Other bodies 0.596 0.659 0.672 0.751 
			 Total 7.496 8.904 8.842 6.092 
		
	
	(19) To date

Local Government Finance

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what preparatory work his Department conducted before the decision to postpone the council tax revaluation in England.

Phil Woolas: My right hon. Friend the Minister of communities and local government set out the Government's reasons for the decision to postpone council tax revaluation on 20 September 2005.

Antisocial Behaviour Orders

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many antisocial behaviour orders were made in Wales in each of the last five years.

Hazel Blears: The available information is given in the following table.
	
		The number of antisocial behaviour orders issued at all courts within Wales, as notified to the Home Office, from 1 July 2000 to 30 June 2005 (latest available)
		
			 Period Total issued 
		
		
			 1 July 2000 to 31 December 2000 2 
			 1 January 2001 to 31 December 2001 5 
			 1 January 2002 to 31 December 2002 12 
			 1 January 2003 to 31 December 2003 59 
			 1 January 2004 to 31 December 2004 94 
			 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 98 
			 Total 270

Police National Computer

Alistair Carmichael: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many individuals have access to the Police National Computer (PNC); what safeguards exist to prevent unlawful access to the PNC; what audit arrangements are in place to monitor inappropriate access to the PNC; what penalties exist for unlawful use of the PNC; and what guidance has been issued on the appropriate course of action if officers are found to have misused the system.

Hazel Blears: We take the security of the Police National Computer (PNC) very seriously. Ownership of all the police data rests with chief constables. Each force's security and access protocols must be in accordance with the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) and Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland (ACPOS) Information Systems Community Security Policy that also governs usage of the Police National Computer (PNC). Security of the PNC is also governed by an Accreditation Document Set, which contains security countermeasures specifically relating to the PNC. Similar arrangements are also in place for the agencies that have been given authorised access to the PNC.
	For security reasons I am not in a position to describe the arrangements that are in place to prevent or detect unauthorised access to the PNC but I am satisfied that these arrangements are adequate.
	Misuse of the PNC is controlled by legislation and it is for the chief officer to determine the action for redress through the courts or by internal police disciplinary procedures via the police discipline regulations.
	The fact that forces control PNC access locally means that I am unable to provide you with information on the number of people authorised to have access.

Race-related Crime

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps the Government are taking to tackle race-related crime; and if he will make a statement.

Paul Goggins: In recent years the Government have strengthened the criminal penalties for offences such as incitement to racial hatred. The Government have also introduced racially aggravated and religiously aggravated offences. The Racial and Religious Hatred Bill introduces an offence of using threatening words or behaviour with the intent to stir up religious hatred.
	In May 2005, the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) and the Home Office published a Hate Crime Manual: "Hate Crime: Delivering a Quality Service." The manual aims to provide tactical and practical guidance to police forces and authorities on the handling and investigation of hate crime including racially and religiously motivated offences.
	In July 2003 the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) published a policy statement which made a clear commitment to prosecute racist and religious crime fairly, firmly and robustly. The publication of the CPS Racist Incident Monitoring Annual Report 2004–2005 shows the achievements of the CPS in bringing offenders to justice.
	Under the terms of the Code of Practice for Victims of Crime on reporting and recording racist incidents, victims of racially or religiously motivated offences are defined as vulnerable and will receive an enhanced service.
	The Race Relations Act places a statutory general duty on public authorities to promote good relations between persons of different racial groups and in July 2005 the Commission for Racial Equality produced "Promoting Good Race Relations; A Guide for Public Authorities."
	Additionally, in 2002, the Home Office issued guidance to crime reduction partnerships on tackling racist antisocial behaviour. This included a Racist Crime and Harassment Toolkit.
	Home Office officials are currently working with a small number of key stakeholders to take forward a range of work to tackle race, faith and homophobic hate crime more effectively. It is envisaged that this work—will include projects to improve the local response to hate crime, increase victim confidence in the criminal justice system, increase the proportion of victims who report hate crimes and the proportion of those crimes that are brought to justice, and improve the evidence base on hate crime.

Sex Offenders

Mark Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the answer of 30 January to Question 44622, on sex offenders, what information is supplied to the police regarding the relevant conviction in court to enable enforcement of the requirement of the offender to notify the police; how many relevant offenders were required to make an initial notification to the police in 2005; and how many did so.

Hazel Blears: The courts will provide the police with an offender's name, address and date of birth; the offence(s), sentence(s) and date of the conviction(s); any ancillary orders made by the court and the duration of the notification period (the period of time the individual will spend "on the sex offenders register"). Figures for the number of offenders who become subject to the notification requirements in any 12 month period are not held centrally. In 2001 we introduced the Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) and the requirement on each police and probation area to produce annual reports detailing the work undertaken to safeguard the public and manage dangerous offenders in the community. The MAPPA reports include statistics on the number of offenders who are subject to the notification requirements. The 2004–05 reports state that on 31 March 2005 there were 28,994 registered sex offenders living in the community.

Afghanistan

Geoffrey Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what progress has been made in identifying the opium supply route in Afghanistan.

Kim Howells: The identification of opium supply routes out of Afghanistan is based on seizure rates of opiates along the heroin trafficking routes. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime's 2004 Afghanistan Opium Survey showed that of Afghanistan's total opiate exports (500 metric tons of morphine and heroin and close to 100 metric tons of opium), about a quarter is exported via Central Asia (the "Northern" or "Silk" Route), but the bulk is still exported via Pakistan and Iran to Turkey and into the Balkans, (the "Balkan Route"). 90 per cent. of the drugs exported on the "Northern Route" are for the Russian market. Most of the opiates exported on the "Balkan Route" are destined for Europe. There is some evidence that the "Caspian Route", from Turkmenistan across the Caspian Sea into the Caucasus, is increasingly being used to traffic drugs into Europe.

Afghanistan

Geoffrey Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what the estimated time scale is for eradicating poppy production in each region of Afghanistan; and what methods are being deployed to that end.

Kim Howells: Afghanistan has been the world's major supplier of illicit opium for a decade. It will take a long time to uproot something so deeply entrenched in Afghanistan's culture and economy. Without a strong state, a fully functioning judiciary or a properly trained and manned police force, Afghan capability to date has been limited.
	There is no simple answer to how long the Afghan counter narcotics effort will take. At the opening of the London Conference, President Karzai said
	"In my view, and in the view of the United Nations that shares it with me, perhaps Afghanistan will need at least 10 years of a strong systematic consistent effort in eradication, in law enforcement and in the provision to the Afghan farmer of an alternative economy in order for us to be free of poppies by that time. So I would give it a decade, at least."
	It will certainly require a sustained effort by the Afghan Government and the international community.
	But progress is being made. Last year, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime reported a 21 per cent. reduction in poppy cultivation from 131,000 hectares (ha) in 2003–04 to 104,000 ha in 2004–05. These overall percentages, however, mask significant variations between provinces. For example, Nangarhar (-96 per cent.), Badakshan (-53 per cent.) and Helmand (-10 per cent.) saw the most significant decreases, while other provinces, such as Balkh and Farah, saw increases. Progress was also made in 2005 with the establishment of a Ministry for Counter Narcotics in Afghanistan, the passage of vital counter narcotics legislation, the conviction of over 90 drug traffickers and the seizure of some 160 tonnes of opiates.
	The Government of Afghanistan has, with the support of the UK as designated partner nation for counter narcotics, recently reviewed and updated its National Drugs Control Strategy to ensure its policy approach is the right one. The strategy, which was launched at the London Conference, focuses on four key priorities: targeting the trafficker; building institutions; strengthening rural livelihoods; and reducing domestic demand. The strategy also sets out the basis for a targeted ground based eradication policy and highlights the importance of raising public awareness and improving international and regional co-operation on counter narcotics. The UK is spending over £270 million over the next three years in support of the strategy.

Afghanistan

Geoffrey Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether the Government prefers destruction, licensing or substitution by other crops to tackle poppy production in Afghanistan; and what budget his Department has allocated to each of these alternatives.

Kim Howells: The UK believes that the Government of Afghanistan's recently updated national drug control strategy represents the best means of securing a sustainable reduction on the production and trafficking of opiates in Afghanistan. The strategy highlights four key priorities. These are: disrupting the drugs trade by targeting traffickers and their backers; strengthening and diversifying legal rural livelihoods; developing effective state institutions to combat drugs at the central and provincial level; reducing the demand for illicit drugs and treatment for problem drug users. The strategy also states that there is a role for targeted ground-based eradication where alternative livelihoods exist, in order to incentivise the shift away from poppy cultivation.
	The UK does not carry out eradication, but we do support Afghan eradication activity where alternative livelihoods exist. We have therefore provided support to the planning, monitoring and targeting work of the Government of Afghanistan's central eradication planning and monitoring cell. We have also funded a United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime project to verify governor-led eradication and provided funding to support targeted eradication by the Afghan national police.
	On licensing of opium production, the Afghan Minister for counter narcotics has said:
	"The poor security situation in the country means there can simply be no guarantee that opium will not be smuggled out of the country for the illicit narcotics trade abroad. Without an effective control mechanism, a lot of opium will still be refined into heroin for illicit markets in the West and elsewhere. We could not accept this."
	The UK agrees with and supports the Government of Afghanistan's position.
	We do not believe that licensing opium cultivation in Afghanistan is a realistic solution to the problems of the opium economy in Afghanistan. In the absence of a strong state presence throughout the country there is currently too high a risk of diversion of legally produced opium into illegal channels, and overall levels of illicit cultivation could increase as a result.
	Helping Afghan farmers develop viable commercial crops as feasible economic alternatives to poppy is an important part of the UK's support. But farmers also need access to credit, land and markets, alternative employment opportunities (on and off the farm) infrastructure such as irrigation and roads to help grow and transport produce; and government emergency mechanisms to ensure food security. The UK is supporting the Government of Afghanistan to deliver in all of these areas, to enforce the Afghan law against growing poppy and inject risk into the system through a credible drugs law enforcement and manual poppy field eradication threat. Only in this way will we make a sustainable impact on cultivation and production.
	The UK will spend over £270 million over this and the next two financial years in support of the national drugs control strategy. During this period, £130 million will be spent on legal rural livelihoods (including research into alternative crops) and institutional development by the Department for International Development. In 2005–06 the UK spent £6 million in support of Afghan eradication and related activity and £30 million in support of activity to target the trafficker (for law enforcement and criminal justice action) and the top end of the trade. We envisage that similar budgets will be allocated to these activities in 2006–08. The UK does not support licensing and no budget was allocated to this as a result.

Iceland (Whaling Programme)

Lindsay Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on his discussions with the Icelandic Foreign Minister on 18 January on Iceland's whaling programme.

Ian Pearson: The UK's opposition to Iceland's whaling programme has been consistent and strong. In May 2005, the UK-led protests against Iceland's decision to take 39 minke whales for "scientific" reasons and we will continue to oppose any future whaling activities. The focus of the recent meeting between my right. hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary and his Icelandic counterpart was Afghanistan and the Middle East. Whaling was not discussed.

"We Can Help"

Malcolm Rifkind: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the total cost of the production and distribution of the "We Can Help" DVD has been to date.

Anne McGuire: The total cost is £156,579, including VAT (£133,259 excluding VAT).
	The DVD was produced to promote Jobcentre Plus disability services. The product is flexible to allow information to be given in Welsh, ethnic minority languages, British Sign Language and sub-titles. It also provides audio-description for those with visual impairments.

Benefits

Jennifer Willott: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people in Wales are (a) entitled to council tax benefits and (b) receiving council tax benefits; and if he will make a statement.

James Plaskitt: The latest available information on unclaimed council tax benefit is in "Income Related Benefits Estimates of Take Up in 2003/2004", a copy of which is in the Library.
	As at August 2005 there were 277,000 households in Wales receiving council tax benefit.

3G Mobile Telephones

Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what research her Department has evaluated on the effects on health of 3G mobile telephones.

Caroline Flint: The Health Protection Agency's radiation protection division (HPA-RPD) periodically evaluates the scientific research relating to mobile phone technology and health including that relevant to third generation (3G) mobile phones. The Stewart report in 2000 comprehensively reviewed the scientific literature and concluded that
	"the balance of evidence to date suggests that exposures below [international] guidelines do not cause health effects to the general population".
	More recently, Mobile Phones and Health 2004, reiterated the Stewart report's conclusions noting that
	"there is a lack of hard information showing that the mobile phone systems in use are damaging to health".
	Both the above reports recommended a precautionary approach to the use of mobile phone technology pending the availability of more robust scientific research results. The reports are available on the HPA's website at www.hpa.org.uk/radiation.
	The widespread use of mobile phones and the development of newer technologies mean that the possibility of health effects should be continually monitored. Following the results in 2003 of research on 3G base station exposures apparently showing a health effect, the mobile telecommunications and health research (MTHR) programme in this country is now supporting a study at the university of Essex into the symptoms experienced by 3G signals on volunteers (www.mthr.org.uk).
	All mobile phones and base stations in this country comply with the international guidelines. Measurements undertaken both by the HPA and by Ofcom (www.ofcom.org.uk) have consistently shown that exposures to radio signals from base stations, including those from 3G stations, are lower than the international guidelines.

Ambulance Services

Gregory Barker: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will make a statement on plans to regionalise ambulance services in East Sussex.

Caroline Flint: "Configuration of NHS Ambulance Trusts in England: Consultation Document" sets out the proposed new ambulance trusts on which we are currently consulting. This includes the proposal for a new trust (referred to in the document as South East A) which would comprise the areas covered by the current Sussex, Kent and Surrey ambulance trusts, if the proposals are agreed. However, no decision has been made, or will be, until the consultation has concluded.
	A copy of "Configuration of NHS Ambulance Trusts in England: Consultation Document" is available in the Library. A copy of my ministerial statement on this consultation, dated 14 December 2005, Official Report, column 152WS is also available in the Library.

Cervical Smear Tests

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether she has received the formal options appraisal of reducing waiting times for the results of cervical smear tests from the university of Sheffield; if she will place a copy of the appraisal in the Library; and if she will make a statement.

Rosie Winterton: A draft version of the options appraisal for reducing waiting times for the results of cervical screening tests was delivered to the Department on 16 January 2006. The advisory committee on cervical screening met in the 18 January to discuss the report, and their views have been passed to the authors of the report to consider. A copy of the final version of the options appraisal will be placed in the Library.

General Medical Council

Nick Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the annual renewal fee for registration with the General Medical Council was in each year since 2000.

Jane Kennedy: The annual renewal fee for registration with the General Medical Council in the year 2000 was £135. In 2001, the fee was £170. In 2002, this was set at £290 and has remained at this amount in subsequent years.

GM Food

Alan Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what recent research findings she has assessed on the health implications of (a) GM soya and (b) the introduction of genes from bean varieties into GM peas.

Caroline Flint: The Food Standards Agency (FSA) has sought advice from the advisory committee on novel food and processes (ACNFP) regarding what conclusions may be drawn from the results of a preliminary study conducted in Russia on the offspring of rats given flour from genetically modified soya beans. The ACNFP discussed this study on 24 November 2005 and a statement detailing its comments has been published on the ACNFP's website along with the draft minutes of the meeting.
	At the same meeting, the FSA also sought advice from the ACNFP on a paper published by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, which details the immunological effects in mice exposed to peas genetically modified to contain a bean protein. The ACNFP's comments will be finalised when the minutes are formally adopted at the following meeting in January 2006. The draft minutes are available on the ACNFP's website at: www.acnfp.gov.uk/meetings/acnfpmeet2006/acnfpmeet25jan06/acnfpagendapapers25jan06.

General Practitioner Appointments

John Randall: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many people have (a) requested and (b) received an appointment to see a GP within 48 hours in (i) Uxbridge constituency and (ii) Greater London, broken down by London borough, in each year since 1997.

Jane Kennedy: The Department does not hold this information in the format requested.
	However, the table shows the percentage of patients that were able to be offered a consultation with a general practitioner within two working days by London primary care trusts for March 2003 to December 2005.
	
		
			 Percentage 
			  March 2003 March 2004 March 2005(31) December 2005(31) 
		
		
			 Uxbridge 
			 Q04 5AT 5AT 5AT Hillingdon PCT 88.38 97.63 100.00 100.00 
			 London borough PCTs:  
			 Q05 5A9 5A9 5A9 Barnet PCT 79.75 100.00 100.00 100.00 
			 Q05 5K7 5K7 5K7 Camden PCT 87.05 96.38 100.00 100.00 
			 Q05 SCI SCI SCI Enfield PCT 70.71 100.00 100.00 100.00 
			 Q05 5C9 5C9 5C9 Haringey Teaching PCT 92.98 100.00 100.00 100.00 
			 Q05 5K8 5K8 5K8 Islington PCT 69.67 100.00 100.00 100.00 
			  
			 Q06 5C2 5C2 5C2 Barking & Dagenham PCT 86.17 100.00 100.00 100.00 
			 Q06 5C3 5C3 5C3 City & Hackney PCT 84.03 100.00 100.00 100.00 
			 Q06 5A4 5A4 5A4 Havering PCT 90.25 100.00 100.00 100.00 
			 Q06 5C5 5C5 5C5 Newham PCT 90.31 96.33 100.00 100.00 
			 Q06 5C4 5C4 5C4 Tower Hamlets PCT 67.38 100.00 100.00 100.00 
			 Q06 — 5NC 5NC Waltham Forest PCT(32) — 100.00 100.00 100.00 
			 Q06 — SNA SNA Redbridge PCT(32) — 100.00 100.00 100.00 
			 Q06 5C6 — — Walthamstow, Leyton & Leytonstone PCT(32) 79.58 — — — 
			 Q06 5C7 — — Chingford, Wanstead & Woodford PCT(32) 55.57 — — — 
			  
			 Q04 5K5 5K5 5K5 Brent PCT 81.88 100.00 100.00 100.00 
			 Q04 5HX 5HX 5HX Ealing PCT 68.13 97.19 100.00 100.00 
			 Q04 5H1 5H1 5H1 Hammersmith & Fulham PCT 95.92 97.12 100.00 100.00 
			 Q04 5K6 5K6 5K6 Harrow PCT 90.53 98.73 100.00 100.00 
			 Q04 SAT SAT SAT Hillingdon PCT 88.38 97.63 100.00 100.00 
			 Q04 SHY SHY SHY Hounslow PCT 62.77 100.00 100.00 100.00 
			 Q04 5LA 5LA 5LA Kensington & Chelsea PCT 86.84 90.40 100.00 100.00 
			 Q04 5LC 5LC 5LC Westminster PCT 78.90 91.35 100.00 100.00 
			  
			 Q07 5AX 5AX 5TAK Bexley Care Trust 95.96 100.00 100.00 100.00 
			 Q07 5A7 5A7 5A7 Bromley PCT 90.83 93.55 100.00 100.00 
			 Q07 5A8 5A8 5A8 Greenwich Teaching PCT 80.40 93.36 100.00 100.00 
			 Q07 5LD 5LD 5LD Lambeth PCT 92.11 96.75 100.00 100.00 
			 Q07 5LF 5LF 5LF Lewisham PCT 95.59 92.74 97.36 100.00 
			 Q07 5LE 5LE 5LE Southwark PCT 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 
			  
			 Q08 5K9 5K9 5K9 Croydon PCT 95.41 98.92 100.00 100.00 
			 Q08 5A5 5A5 5A5 Kingston PCT 93.30 93.03 100.00 100.00 
			 Q08 5M6 5M6 5M6 Richmond & Twickenham PCT 98.50 100.00 100.00 100.00 
			 Q08 5M7 5M7 5M7 Sutton & Merton PCT 83.63 100.00 100.00 100.00 
			 Q08 5LG 5LG 5LG Wandsworth PCT 85.04 98.52 100.00 100.00 
		
	
	(31) From April 2004, access to a GP at a local NHS Walk-in Centre may count towards the 48 hour primary care access target, but only for practices that have an agreement with an NHS Walk-in Centre, which offers GP services, that includes referring and/or diverting practice patients.
	(32) From April 2003 Walthamstow, Leyton & Leytonstone PCT, Chingford, Wanstead & Woodford PCT and Redbridge PCT merged into the two new PCTs, Waltham Forest PCT and Redbridge PCT.
	Source:
	Primary Care Access Survey-Percentage of patients able to be offered a consultation with a general practitioner within two working days.

HIV/AIDS

Nigel Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether she plans to launch a new advertising campaign on the transmission of HIV/AIDS.

Caroline Flint: Awareness of sexually transmitted infections, including HIV, will be addressed through a new sexual health media campaign, announced as part of the "Choosing Health" White Paper to modernise and transform sexual health in England. The campaign will focus on the risks of unprotected sex and the benefits of using condoms to avoid the risk of sexually transmitted infections including HIV.
	A major aim for the new sexual health campaign is normalising condom use and implicitly this will contribute to reducing the risk of HIV. The proposed new campaign is additional and complementary to, existing HIV awareness campaigns for those most at risk, in partnership with key voluntary sector organisations.

Hospital Beds

Francis Maude: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  how many hospital beds there were per capita in each health authority area in England for each year for which records are available;
	(2)  what the average bed occupancy rate was in each health authority area in England for each year for which records are available.

Jane Kennedy: Data for the years 2000–01 and 2001–02 is shown in the table. Health authorities (HA) were abolished in 2002 and, therefore, data after 2001–02 are not available on an HA basis.
	Data prior to 2000–01 could be provided only at a disproportionate cost. However, trust level data on bed occupancy is available on the Department's website at: www.performance.doh.gov.uk/hospitalactivity. Data prior to 1996–97 are not available.

Jentle Service

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  how much revenue has been raised by the Jentle Service at the maternity department of the Queen Charlotte's and Chelsea Hospital; and what the service offers to expectant mothers;
	(2)  how many women have so far subscribed to the Jentle Service provided by the maternity department at the Queen Charlotte's and Chelsea Hospital.

Jane Kennedy: The Hammersmith Hospitals Trust's scheme is called "Birth—the Jentle Midwifery Scheme". The scheme only applies to the Queen Charlotte's and Chelsea hospital.
	The scheme provides for two options. The first is for private patients. The second option is a midwifery-led scheme for national health service patients, which offers continuity for the woman and ensures she has a named midwife throughout her pregnancy, birth and the postnatal period. The scheme incorporates antenatal care, the birth and postnatal care. The trust bills the woman £4,000 for this scheme. The option does not include any other services or facilities except that a single amenity room is included in the package for the first night, if one is available.
	The number of women that have used the scheme including those delivered and those still pregnant is 74. The number of babies delivered so far is 51.
	The total amount invoiced to date for the Jentle Midwifery Scheme is £164,998.

LIFT Scheme

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  whether the issues set out in the letter dated 13 December to a director of development of a primary care trust from the NHS LIFT Policy Lead of the Capital Investment Branch of her Department outlining mandatory changes to the Local Improvement Finance Trust (LIFT) scheme were previously discussed with the chairman and members of the LIFT Liaison Organisation for Business Investors (LIFT LOBI); and what plans (a) she and (b) officials of her Department have to meet with LIFT LOBI to discuss these issues;
	(2)  whether the contents of the letter dated 13 December to a director of development of a primary care trust from the NHS Lift Policy Lead of the Capital Investment Branch of her Department outlining mandatory changes to the Local Improvement Finance Trust (LIFT) scheme represent the policy of her Department; what consultations were undertaken with (a) primary care trusts, (b) LIFT companies, (c) Partnerships for Health, (d) business investors and (e) other stakeholders about the matters contained in that letter; and whether those consultations were in accordance with the Code of Practice on Consultations issued by the Cabinet Office;
	(3)  whether the issues set out in the letter dated 13 December to a director of development of a primary care trust from the NHS Lift Policy Lead of the Capital Investment Branch of her Department outlining mandatory changes to the Local Improvement Finance Trust (LIFT) scheme were previously raised by the representatives of the Capital Investment Branch at the Lift in Action Steering Group on 4 November;
	(4)  what assessment she has made of whether the policy developments set out in the letter dated 13 December 2005 to a Director of Development of a Primary Care Trust from the NHS LIFT Policy Lead of the Capital Investment Branch of her Department outlining mandatory changes to the Local Improvement Finance Trust (LIFT) scheme are consistent with (a) the findings of the recent National Audit Office Report on the LIFT scheme and (b) the letter from the chief executive of the national health service to the chair of the LIFT Liaison Organisation for Business Investors dated 25 October 2005; and if she will make a statement.

Liam Byrne: The letter of 13 December, to the director of development for Bristol South and West Primary Care Trust, confirmed the Department's decision to require the standard private finance initiative contract to be used in future for complex individual Local Improvement Finance Trust (LIFT) facilities with a capital value of over £25 million. This decision was taken to ensure appropriate risk transfer for these very large LIFT facilities, which are much larger and cover additional services than those originally intended to be undertaken under LIFT. The decision simply involves the use of a different contract for the limited number of LIFT facilities where it is more appropriate. It does not represent a major policy, financial or service change, and for this reason, no formal consultations were undertaken with stakeholders including the LIFT Liaison Organisation for Business Investors (LIFT LOBI). This is in line with the Cabinet Office's "Code of Practice on Consultation". The Department's national health service LIFT policy lead met representatives of LIFT LOBI on 9 January to discuss and explain the decision, and is also holding a series of meetings with the primary care trusts affected. I have no plans to meet members of LIFT LOBI.
	The issues set out in the letter of 13 December were not raised by officials at the LIFT in action steering group meeting on 4 November as the policy was still under internal departmental development.
	The policy developments set out in the letter are consistent with the National Audit Office report on the LIFT scheme, which endorses LIFT as an initiative to support the redevelopment of the primary care estate. They are also consistent with the letter from the chief executive of the NHS to the chair of the LIFT LOBI dated 25 October 2005.

Mental Health

Anne Main: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment she has made of mental health care provision in Hertfordshire; and if she will make a statement.

Rosie Winterton: An annual assessment if undertaken by mental health strategies on behalf of the Department. The latest published report is autumn 2005, "Assessment of Mental Health 2005" which is available on the Department's website at:
	www.dh.gov.uk/assetRoot/04/11/84/54/04118454.pdf and
	www.dh.gov.uk/assetRoot/04/11/84/55/04118455.pdf.

MRSA

Evan Harris: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many MRSA infections were recorded in NHS hospitals for (a) 2003, (b) 2004 and (c) 2005 and which of these (i) were in and (ii) were related to renal units by disease area.

Jane Kennedy: National surveillance covers methicillin resistant Staphylococcus "auerus" (MRSA) blood stream infections (bacteraemias), not all MRSA infections. National data is shown in the table and data for individual trusts is available on the Departments website at: www.dh.gov.uk/assetRoot?04/11/40/15/04114015.pdf.
	
		
			  Number of MRSA bacteraemias 
		
		
			 April 2002-March 2003 7,373 
			 April 2003-March 2004 7,684 
			 April 2004-March 2005 7,212 
		
	
	Source:
	Health Protection Agency

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence

Sandra Gidley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many meetings Ministers in her Department have had with the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence in the last 12 months; and what the reasons for the meetings were in each case.

Jane Kennedy: In the past 12 months there have been five meetings between departmental Ministers and the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). Those meeting and their purposes are as follows:
	Meeting between the chair and chief executive of NICE with myself and the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health (Caroline Flint) on 9 June 2005 as an introduction to NICE'S work;
	Annual accountability review of NICE attended by myself, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health (Caroline Flint) and Brian Gibbons AM, the Welsh Assembly Government Minister for Health and Social Services, on 13 October 2005;
	Meeting between Professor Sir Michael Rawlins and Lord Warner on 9 January 2006 to discuss the potential contribution of NICE to the quality and outcomes framework;
	Meeting between Professor Sir Michael Rawlins and the Secretary of State on 12 January 2006 to discuss NICE'S citizens council, and
	Meeting between the chair and chief executive of NICE and myself on 30 January 2006 to have an informal general discussion on issues concerning NICE.

Obesity

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the obesity levels were for (a) children and (b) adults in (i) each health authority area and (ii) each local authority area for the past 30 years in descending order according to the most recent figures.

Caroline Flint: The data is not available in the format requested. The main source of data on the prevalence of obesity is the Health Survey for England (HSE).
	Data on obesity prevalence in children is available at a national level from the Health Survey for England 2002. This survey is available on the Department's website at: www.archive2.official-documents.co.uk/document/deps/doh/survey02/hse02.htm. The children's sample size of the HSE does riot allow figures to be produced at the level of strategic health authority (SHA) or local authority area.
	Data on obesity in adults is shown in table 1. The table provides the proportion of adults, aged 16 and over, who are obese (mean body mass index (BMI) over 30) for each SHA between 1994 and 2002. Data for earlier years are not available. The results from the table are taken from the Health Survey for England: Health and lifestyles indicators for Strategic Health Authorities 1994–2002 report. The data shows BMI as a three-year moving average, with the latest data available in this format being 2000–2002. The sample size of the HOUSE does not allow figures to be produced at the level of local health authority areas.
	
		Table 1: Age standardised proportion of adults who are obese (BMI over 30), by year (three-year moving average) and sex, England, 1994–2002
		
			 Area Persons 
			 Code Name 1994–96 1995–97 1996–98 1997–99 
			   % SI % SI % SI % SI 
		
		
			 Q10 County Durham and Tees Valley 16.5  18.9  19.2  19.1  
			 Q09 Northumberland, Tyne and Wear 16.3  18.4  19.9  21.0  
			 Q15 Cheshire and Merseyside 16.1  16.1  17.0  18.6  
			 Q13 Cumbria and Lancashire 15.0  17.4  18.7  19.3  
			 Q14 Greater Manchester 14.9 Low 15.3 Low 17.0  19.0  
			 Q11 North and East Yorkshire and Northern Lincolnshire 17.6  18.6  19.7  20.2  
			 Q23  19.1 High 17.9  18.6  17.1  
			 Q12 West Yorkshire 16.3  16.1  18.1  18.2  
			 Q25 Leicestershire, Northamptonshire and Rutland 16.6  16.5  16.8  18.2  
			 Q24 Trent 18.4 High 18.9  19.5  19.1  
			 Q27 Birmingham and the Black Country 20.4 High 20.7 High 21.3 High 21.3 High 
			 Q28 West Midlands South 16.1  17.7  19.3  21.9  
			 Q26 Shropshire and Staffordshire 19.0 High 19.3  19.0  20.6  
			 Q02 Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire 15.5  16.1  16.3  18.4  
			 Q03 Essex 13.8  16.5  18.3  17.9  
			 Q0117.2  19.5  19.9  
			 Q05 North Central London 13.1 Low 14.8  15.5  14.1  
			 Q06 North East London 16.6  17.7  18.0  20.1  
			 Q04 North West London 16.1  17.1  17.1  18.8  
			 Q07 South East London 19.1 High 18.8  18.8  18.8  
			 Q08 South West London 12.3 Low 12.5 Low 14.8 Low 15.4  
			 Q17 Hampshire and Isle of Wight 15.0  17.1  17.9  18.8  
			 Q18 Kent and Medway 17.7  20.0 High 20.3  19.7  
			 Q19 Surrey and Sussex 13.4 Low 14.9 Low 16.9  17.4  
			 Q16 Thames Valley 16.9  17.1  16.7  16.5  
			 Q20 Avon, Gloucestershire and Wiltshire 15.8  15.4 Low 15.8 Low 16.1 Low 
			 Q22 Dorset and Somerset 18.3  18.6  19.1  19.3  
			 Q21 South West Peninsula 16.9  18.1  17.8  18.9  
		
	
	
		
			 Code Name 1998–2000 1999–2001 2000–02 
			   % SI % SI % SI 
		
		
			 Q10 County Durham and Tees Valley 19.3  23.8  27.3 High 
			 Q09 Northumberland, Tyne and Wear 20.8  21.3  21.3  
			 Q15 Cheshire and Merseyside 19.4  20.9  21.0  
			 Q13 Cumbria and Lancashire 21.2  21.5  22.4  
			 Q14 Greater Manchester 20.3  20.2  21.1  
			 Q11 North and East Yorkshire and Northern Lincolnshire 21.7  23.9 High 26.1 High 
			 Q23  18.0  17.1 Low 19.6  
			 Q12 West Yorkshire 18.1  18.5  20.8  
			 Q25 Leicestershire, Northamptonshire and Rutland 20.5  22.1  24.3  
			 Q24 Trent 21.7  23.0  25.1 High 
			 Q27 Birmingham and the Black Country 23.4 High 24.0 High 24.9 High 
			 Q28 West Midlands South 21.1  23.1  22.6  
			 Q26 Shropshire and Staffordshire 21.5  22.1  22.9  
			 Q02 Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire 18.1  20.1  18.8 Low 
			 Q03 Essex 19.4  19.2  20.2  
			 Q01  20.1  20.6  21.6  
			 Q05 North Central London 17.9  17.5  18.4  
			 Q06 North East London 20.7  20.9  20.7  
			 Q04 North West London 19.8  21.0  18.4 Low 
			 Q07 South East London 18.6  18.2  19.2  
			 Q08 South West London 20.2  19.9  24.3  
			 Q17 Hampshire and Isle of Wight 19.4  20.9  21.4  
			 Q18 Kent and Medway 20.0  21.5  23.1  
			 Q19 Surrey and Sussex 17.4 Low 17.3 Low 17.6 Low 
			 Q16 Thames Valley 17.3 Low 17.3 Low 18.9 Low 
			 Q20 Avon, Gloucestershire and Wiltshire 17.8  19.4  17.3 Low 
			 Q22 Dorset and Somerset 18.9  19.7  19.3  
			 Q21 South West Peninsula 18.5  19.9  19.9  
		
	
	Notes
	In the SI (significance indicator) column, "High"/"Low" indicate age standardised values for this SHA that are significantly higher/lower than the England average, at the 95 per cent. confidence level.
	LCL= Lower 95 per cent. confidence interval; UCL= Upper 95 per cent. confidence interval
	Source:
	Health Survey for England: Health and Lifestyle indicators for Strategic Health Authorities 1994–2002 Department of Health
	
		Table 2 shows the proportion of adults who are obese (BMI of 30 and above) for each Government office region for 2003Obesity prevalence (age-standardised), by Government office region and sex
		
			Percentage 
			 Government office region 
			 Aged 16 and over with both valid height and weight measurements 2003 
			 BMI (kg/ m2) over 30 North East North West Yorkshire and the Humber East Midlands West Midlands East England London South East South West 
		
		
			 Men 22.6 23.8 25.4 23.8 24.1 24.6 18.7 19.5 22.4 
			 Women 26.6 26.1 28.5 27.4 31.4 26.9 23.0 21.1 22.5 
			 Bases (unweighted)  
			 Men 368 849 560 574 629 728 727.0 930 601 
			 Women 468 1006 667 678 778 825 837.0 1119 712 
			 Bases (weighted)   
			 Men 339 878 634 591 676 755 930.0 1052 663 
			 Women 376 901 650 582 696 735 876.0 1071 683 
		
	
	Source:
	Health Survey for England 2003—Risk factors for cardiovascular disease

Obesity

John Randall: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many primary school pupils in (a) England, (b) London, (c) London borough of Hillingdon and (d) Uxbridge constituency are identified as (i) overweight and (ii) obese.

Caroline Flint: The data is not available in the format requested. The main source of data on the prevalence of obesity is the health survey for England (HSE). The sample size of the health survey does not allow figures to be produced at the level of London boroughs or parliamentary constituencies. For children, aged two to 10-years, national and Government office region (GOR) figures are presented using the national BMI percentile classification.
	The available information is presented in the two following tables, using the estimated obesity and/or overweight prevalence results of the HSE for 2001, 2002 and 2003. The national level data presented are the most recent available, and shows overweight and obesity prevalence among children. Data at GOR level is only available for obesity prevalence. GOR data provided are the most recent available and use combined information from the 2001 and 2002 surveys.
	
		Overweight and obesity prevalence among children aged two to 10-years, England, 2003
		
			  Children aged two-10-years with valid BMI 
		
		
			 Obese percentage 13.7 
			 Overweight including obese percentage 27.7 
			 Bases (weighted) 1774 
			 Bases (unweighted) 1733 
		
	
	Notes:
	Prevalence based on the UK national BMI percentile classification.
	Source:
	"Obesity among children under 11, 2005". Department of Health and the Health and Social Care Information Centre
	
		Obesity prevalence among children aged two to 10-years, London, 2001–02
		
			  Children aged two-10-years with valid BMI 
		
		
			 Obese percentage 18.2 
			 Bases (weighted) 830 
			 Bases (unweighted) 701 
		
	
	Notes:
	Prevalence based on the UK national BMI percentile classification.
	Source:
	"Obesity among children under 11, 2005". Department of Health and the Health and Social Care Information Centre